On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 03:31:16PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 06:05:37AM -0800, Breno Leitao wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 12:21:47PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 02:16:35AM -0800, Breno Leitao wrote: > > > > The arm64 kernel doesn't boot with annotated branches > > > > (PROFILE_ANNOTATED_BRANCHES) enabled and CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL together. > > > > > > > > Bisecting it, I found that disabling branch profiling in arch/arm64/mm > > > > solved the problem. Narrowing down a bit further, I found that > > > > physaddr.c is the file that needs to have branch profiling disabled to > > > > get the machine to boot. > > > > > > > > I suspect that it might invoke some ftrace helper very early in the boot > > > > process and ftrace is still not enabled(!?). > > > > > > > > Rather than playing whack-a-mole with individual files, disable branch > > > > profiling for the entire arch/arm64 tree, similar to what x86 already > > > > does in arch/x86/Kbuild. > > > > > > > > Cc: [email protected] > > > > Fixes: ec6d06efb0bac ("arm64: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL") > > > > Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <[email protected]> > > > > > > I don't think ec6d06efb0bac is to blame here, and CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL > > > is unsound in a number of places, so I'd prefer to remove that Fixes tag > > > and backport this for all stable trees. > > > > That is fair, thanks for the review. > > > > Should I submit a new version without the fixes tag, or, do you guys do > > it while merging the patch? > > I assume that Catalin or Will can handle that when applying (if they > agree with me); no need to respin.
Thanks Mark.
